closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Results 1 to 49 of 49

Thread: Car Tax

  1. #1
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1

    Car Tax

    I was thinking of changing my 15 plate 5 Series Touring only done 38k miles. I was looking for another 5 Series 18 plate sort of 12 months old, well blow me when looking at the Car Tax could not believe it was going to cost £145 plus £320 per year for Five years because the cars list price was over 40k.

    I have always contract hired so VED was built in, itís come as a shock, so much so I keep my money in me pocket. My wife has the a new GLC so me changing is not imperative.

  2. #2
    Master Tifa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Shropshire UK
    Posts
    1,006
    That's a bit of a killer.
    Just paid £30 for my 16 reg BMW 420.

  3. #3
    Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    south wales
    Posts
    2,379
    I think they changed all the tax rates in 2017..so cars registered after that date get hammered!

  4. #4
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    dunfermline fife
    Posts
    341
    I think my 10 year old Honda is £555 next renewal, I try to think of it as £10 a week, or a couple of pints worth.

  5. #5
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1
    Yup looks that way if it’s over 40k you are hammered, well they are not going to hammer me. I really like the 5 as it’s the a real Luxury BMW made with puka materials all the lower models are cheap plastics interiors which I hate.
    Last edited by hilly10; 10th September 2019 at 20:54.

  6. #6
    It's a bit weird at the moment. 16 reg seem to be the best bet, before they bought in flat rates. My GTE is free.

  7. #7
    £300/year doesnít seem much in the scheme of things for a relatively expensive car.

  8. #8
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1
    If changing I wanted the new shape which was March 2017 the newest before the increase would be 66 plate, so not worth changing for 18 months newer
    Last edited by hilly10; 10th September 2019 at 20:59.

  9. #9
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    17,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    £300/year doesnít seem much in the scheme of things for a relatively expensive car.
    +1......when you work out the cost of running a newer car itís nothing. The newer the car the more itís costing, no matter how you try to dress the numbers up.

    I pay £250/yr road tax on an 8 yr old Jaguar, I do around 4000 miles/year, it seems a lot to pay but at least the depreciation is all done and dusted at this age. I just pay it and I donít moan, it is what it is, it isnít dair but lots of things in life arenít.

    It could be argued that those who choose to run a car costing over £40K can afford the road tax.

  10. #10
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    London
    Posts
    173
    Ah, one of those nice to have problems.

    Plenty of other cars <£40k.

  11. #11
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    11,344
    Quote Originally Posted by hilly10 View Post
    If changing I wanted the new shape which was March 2017 the newest before the increase would be 66 plate, so not worth changing for 18 months newer
    IIRC, you can get a March 2017, 17 plate on the old tax scheme, itís April 2017 on thatís subject to the current tax rates.

  12. #12
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Salisbury
    Posts
    2,204
    I pay £325 for my fun car and £30 a year for my motor way mile muncher. So swings around, I know which makes me smile!

  13. #13
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Mid Glamorgan
    Posts
    3,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    IIRC, you can get a March 2017, 17 plate on the old tax scheme, itís April 2017 on thatís subject to the current tax rates.
    Correct. I have a 17 plate Superb and itís £30 a year tax.

  14. #14
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Chesham, Bucks
    Posts
    328
    I had a 2007 Boxster S (987 3.4 litre 295bhp) tax was £555, sold it, bought at 2014 Boxster S (981 3.4 litre 315bhp) tax is £300 a year. Madness.

  15. #15
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    17,454
    Quote Originally Posted by broxie View Post
    I had a 2007 Boxster S (987 3.4 litre 295bhp) tax was £555, sold it, bought at 2014 Boxster S (981 3.4 litre 315bhp) tax is £300 a year. Madness.
    It is madness, itís all due to politicians pissing about and being seen to make the Ďrightí gestures. Unfortunately it distorts the used car market in some situations.

    The test results (co2 emissions/ mile ) used as data for defining tax bands are also a complete joke.

    Accept it, itís not meant to be fair! If you like a car enough, buy it and take the hit on tax, but donít winge about it.........OPís moaning about tax on a £40K car and frankly heís been a bit silly IMO.

  16. #16
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    £300/year doesnít seem much in the scheme of things for a relatively expensive car.
    Itís not £300 itís £465

  17. #17
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    IIRC, you can get a March 2017, 17 plate on the old tax scheme, itís April 2017 on thatís subject to the current tax rates.
    The new shape was 67 plate so come under new Tax

  18. #18
    Iíve just paid 560 for my M3, which felt a bit steep! As others have said in the context of all the other costs of running a car, itís not that bad and there are plenty of options with low tax.

  19. #19
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    IIRC, you can get a March 2017, 17 plate on the old tax scheme, itís April 2017 on thatís subject to the current tax rates.
    This is my understanding too. I think I'm going to be looking for a 440i that slips into that time-frame.

  20. #20
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1
    Whatís the 4 Series like inside

  21. #21
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by hilly10 View Post
    Whatís the 4 Series like inside
    Pretty nice. Certainly better put together than my current Alfa Giulia...

  22. #22
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Chesham, Bucks
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt8500 View Post
    Iíve just paid 560 for my M3, which felt a bit steep! As others have said in the context of all the other costs of running a car, itís not that bad and there are plenty of options with low tax.
    It used to be called road tax but now it's just another income stream for HMRC along with all other taxes. Just a shame a larger fraction of it isn't spent on the roads. After all, it used to be the larger vehicle the higher the tax on the basis they did more damage to the roads.

    About time we were charged per mile driven not a fixed fee which forces a lot of second car/classics to be sorned during the winter when the occasional blast out keeps the car in good nick and clears the cobwebs.

  23. #23
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Mid Glamorgan
    Posts
    3,591
    Quote Originally Posted by broxie View Post

    About time we were charged per mile driven not a fixed fee which forces a lot of second car/classics to be sorned during the winter when the occasional blast out keeps the car in good nick and clears the cobwebs.
    And then you would see an increase in price of everything that is transported by lorry because the haulage companies sure as hell wouldnít carry the cost. Itís not a realistic solution.

  24. #24
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    17,454
    Road tax has been used for years as a blunt instrument to influence the buying habits of the motoring public. I refuse to use the term Ďmotoristí, thatís an outmoded concept that harks back to the 1920s when cars were a genuine luxury item. The vast majority of us now own cars out of necessity, but successive UK governments persist in trying to treat cars as Ďluxuryí items. The high cost of fuel is dictated by the government persisting in adding lots if tax to the price, in todayís society it isnít justifiable and itís based on historical concepts.

    I could bang on about these things ad nauseam, but nothing will change. Taxing personal transport heavily is a tradition that isnít likely to change in this country. Moaning about the state of the roads is pointless too, perhaps folks should think twice before opting for ultra-low profile tyres and harsh suspension settings, many of todays cars arenít comfortable or suitable for typical UK road surface.

    Iíve owned my car for 8 years, if I count total running costs, including depreciation and loss of interest on capital outlay, I could probably have travelled every journey by taxi and still be no worse off financially.......cars are either expensive or very expensive items and road tax is just another part of it.

    Both mine and my wifeís cars are insured on. a dual car policy with Admiral. I didnít like the renewal premium, which had risen by 18.6% compared to last year. After a short conversation it fell by over £100........strongly advise everyone to query renewal premiums if theyíve risen sharply!

  25. #25
    Vehicle tax was a nonsense. At least before electric vehicles.

    I love that governments are ingenious at dreaming up additional taxes and we just have to suck it up!

    Any tax and basic insurance should have been a levy on fuel. Then either more miles or more fuel consumption would have led to higher tax revenue, and no worries about hit and runs or stolen cars involved in accidents.

    Having lots of vehicles but only driving one at a time across my whole family is a bit of a joke. 19 motorbikes and somewhere between 10-12 cars - keeping them all taxed is just a crazy price to pay. I'll have to sit everyone down and look at total consolidation, as it will probably work out cheaper to run newer/better cars - but the older bikes won't be going, and hopefully will move to low/zero tax in time (although we have a bloody admin charge!).
    It's just a matter of time...

  26. #26
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1
    I love to take the TR6 out on a Sunday no tax etc cheap motoring it’s like sticking my two fingers up at the establishment, but there again with all the taxes I pay it covers it
    Last edited by hilly10; 11th September 2019 at 15:49.

  27. #27
    Grand Master number2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North and South.
    Posts
    19,338
    Put the tax on fuel, those doing most miles pay the most, would get rid of tax dodgers and encourage people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.
    "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."

  28. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by number2 View Post
    Put the tax on fuel, those doing most miles pay the most, would get rid of tax dodgers and encourage people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.
    They already do - the best part of half the cost of all car fuel is tax/ fuel duty.

    https://www.nextgreencar.com/car-tax/fuel-duty/

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluehase284 View Post
    They already do - the best part of half the cost of all car fuel is tax/ fuel duty.

    https://www.nextgreencar.com/car-tax/fuel-duty/
    Yes, but they don't use that to offset any "Road" tax, or insurance etc. Bunch of....

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by number2 View Post
    Put the tax on fuel, those doing most miles pay the most, would get rid of tax dodgers and encourage people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.
    Or they just pay for electric instead these days.
    It's just a matter of time...

  30. #30
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    17,454
    The only saving grace for me is that classic cars (aka 'Historic Vehicles') don`t have to pay road tax, so my 1970 MGB costs nothing to keep on the road (apart from classic insurance at around £160). No MOT test to pay for either, a change which I disagree with but I'll take the £40 saving.

    If I had my way I`d tax cars according to their size, cars have got wider but the country lanes haven`t, modern cars are bloaters compared with what we drove 30 years ago.

    I`d also introduce taxation based on the appearance of the vehicle, SUVs and 4 x 4s are generally pig-ugly things so I`d make them pay 'ugly tax', same would apply to hideous colours, that would stop folks buying purple cars. I`d also apply this to dull colours such as that awful pale grey that Audi are now selling..........the world's depressing enough without having ugly and / or dull cars to look at.

    Electric cars?.......now you're talking! I`d introduce 'smug tax' for those, as a generalisation the owners take great pleasure in telling everyone how cheap they are to run and how they're saving the planet by owning one, make them pay 'smug tax' and they'd soon think again.

    A bit of creativity, that's what we need to make things fairer.......an electric SUV in a really bad colour could pay double ugly tax plus smug tax on top!

  31. #31
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    South east
    Posts
    4,355
    Quote Originally Posted by shoppy View Post
    I pay £325 for my fun car and £30 a year for my motor way mile muncher. So swings around, I know which makes me smile!
    Same here. Well £20 for the GTD if being picky.


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  32. #32
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Mid Glamorgan
    Posts
    3,591
    Quote Originally Posted by number2 View Post
    Put the tax on fuel, those doing most miles pay the most, would get rid of tax dodgers and encourage people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.
    Again, read my post above. The cost of EVERYTHING transported by lorry would go up, and itís us the public who would be paying for it.

  33. #33
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    11,344
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    The only saving grace for me is that classic cars (aka 'Historic Vehicles') don`t have to pay road tax, so my 1970 MGB costs nothing to keep on the road (apart from classic insurance at around £160). No MOT test to pay for either, a change which I disagree with but I'll take the £40 saving.
    Thereís nothing stopping you getting your classic car MOTíd anyway, many owners do so if just for peace of mind!

  34. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    The only saving grace for me is that classic cars (aka 'Historic Vehicles') don`t have to pay road tax, so my 1970 MGB costs nothing to keep on the road (apart from classic insurance at around £160). No MOT test to pay for either, a change which I disagree with but I'll take the £40 saving.
    Never understood this, as old cars spew out all sorts of crap in huge quantities and VED is based on value and emissions they should pay more.

  35. #35
    Craftsman Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    631
    Cyclists should get a shower and a topless massage at the end of every journey. Knowing my luck I would get the massage from a fat sweaty bloke with moobs. I'll pass on the happy ending thanks.

  36. #36
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    17,454
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    Never understood this, as old cars spew out all sorts of crap in huge quantities and VED is based on value and emissions they should pay more.
    Many classic cars only do a few hundred miles/year. They donít spew out Ďall sorts of crapí, no diesel particulates because theyíre all petrol, but they do produce higher levels of unburnt hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide than would be permissible nowadays.

    As a percentage of total vehicle miles covered in the UK classic cars constitute a tiny fraction, and the owners almost always have an everyday car that they pay tax on. Classic car owners may generally be cleverer than average but they arenít clever enough to drive two cars at once. The same argument could be used by anyone who has two cars that can only be driven by themself, they should only pay tax on one because they can only drive one car at once.

  37. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    Many classic cars only do a few hundred miles/year. They donít spew out Ďall sorts of crapí, no diesel particulates because theyíre all petrol, but they do produce higher levels of unburnt hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide than would be permissible nowadays.

    As a percentage of total vehicle miles covered in the UK classic cars constitute a tiny fraction, and the owners almost always have an everyday car that they pay tax on. Classic car owners may generally be cleverer than average but they arenít clever enough to drive two cars at once. The same argument could be used by anyone who has two cars that can only be driven by themself, they should only pay tax on one because they can only drive one car at once.
    I have several cars, in fact one only did ten miles last year, but to use them I still have to tax and MOT them, as I said, I think the exemptions are wrong

  38. #38
    Grand Master Velorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    13,315
    It really doesn't make much difference, the tax revenue stream will be maintained one way or another. When there are tax incentives to changing consumer behaviour, once its changed the up the tax goes. Just see what happens when a significant part of the population switch to electric - they will then become the cash cows.

    Sent from my SM-G970F using TZ-UK mobile app

  39. #39
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southern Spain
    Posts
    22,957
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    but they do produce higher levels of unburnt hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide than would be permissible nowadays.
    Largely because of how it is measured.
    Many a vintage car has a relatively small cilinder capacity and pumps through less air to be polluted. Also they are in general a L”T lighter to need less throttle do drive around Šnd are easier to stop = less rubber particles. Ah and do compare no airco with it running please.

    I am in MŠlaga now with the Volvo 300. Only 1400 cc is under 900 kilos and needs no airco. The modern equivalent has a 2 litre, weighs half more, nťťds the airco running and has less interior space.

    A bit of a con really, agaŪn, that pollution argument.
    When the going gets tough, the DAF gets going.

  40. #40
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    11,344
    Quote Originally Posted by adrianw View Post
    I have several cars, in fact one only did ten miles last year, but to use them I still have to tax and MOT them, as I said, I think the exemptions are wrong
    But youíre the exception rather than the rule, most modern cars are their ownerís primary form of transport whilst most classic cars are a low mileage pastime.

    The difference is doubled in that only a tiny proportion of the cars on the road are classics and that tiny proportion also do minuscule mileages.

    Although substitute classics for super cars and the above statement still holds true so perhaps they should be exempt too!

  41. #41
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    11,344
    Quote Originally Posted by Huertecilla View Post
    I am in MŠlaga now with the Volvo 300. Only 1400 cc is under 900 kilos and needs no airco. The modern equivalent has a 2 litre, weighs half more, nťťds the airco running and has less interior space.
    But does probably 60mpg compared to your carís 30.

    Iím pretty sure that the modern car has wind down windows and a fan/blower too so aircon is no more or less necessary.

  42. #42
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southern Spain
    Posts
    22,957
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post

    Iím pretty sure that the modern car has wind down windows and a fan/blower too so aircon is no more or less necessary.
    Youīre wrong.
    The sleek design of moder cars gives them >100% more glass surface which also is more horizontal with more black plastic under the sun.

    And as to the mpg same thing. The modern 2 liter pertol heavy weight only has good test data on the open roads. Real world economy is disappointing and yes better but only if the 2 literīs potential is not used in accelleration.
    Btw. the 300 does kilometers and liters: running about town just over 8 per 100 and traveling to fro Granada p.e. 7/100.
    When the going gets tough, the DAF gets going.

  43. #43
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    11,344

    Car Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Huertecilla View Post
    Youīre wrong.
    The sleek design of moder cars gives them >100% more glass surface which also is more horizontal with more black plastic under the sun.


    I agree that thereís more glass area and more plastic, I dispute your sweeping statement of >100% though; Whilst itís car dependant, I donít believe that thereís over twice the glass area in a V40 (the smallest current Volvo) than in your 300.


    [QUOTE=Huertecilla;5198121] And as to the mpg same thing. The modern 2 liter petrol heavy weight only has good test data on the open roads. Real world economy is disappointing and yes better but only if the 2 literīs potential is not used in accelleration.
    Your stating the irrelevant here, thatís the same for any engine.



    Quote Originally Posted by Huertecilla View Post
    Btw. the 300 does kilometers and liters: running about town just over 8 per 100 and traveling to fro Granada p.e. 7/100.
    8l/100km is 35mpg; the fuel consumption of the latest V40 is quoted as 78mpg from a 1.5l/152bhp engine. Granted, real world driving it wonít be as high but my point still stands. Your old car may be lighter but itís certainly not more eco friendly!
    Last edited by Dave+63; 12th September 2019 at 13:01.

  44. #44
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Mid Glamorgan
    Posts
    3,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Velorum View Post
    It really doesn't make much difference, the tax revenue stream will be maintained one way or another. When there are tax incentives to changing consumer behaviour, once its changed the up the tax goes. Just see what happens when a significant part of the population switch to electric - they will then become the cash cows.

    Sent from my SM-G970F using TZ-UK mobile app
    How would they go about that if the car is predominately charged at home?

  45. #45
    Grand Master Velorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    13,315
    No need for them to get involved in the charging side of things - simply levy a tax on any electrically propelled vehicle - perhaps by kerb weight or power output.

    The point is that the if revenues drop from one source the imperative will be to change the rules in order to make up the shortfall from another.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytip View Post
    How would they go about that if the car is predominately charged at home?
    Sent from my SM-G970F using TZ-UK mobile app

  46. #46
    Craftsman Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    631
    Smart meters

  47. #47
    Grand Master Velorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    13,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Templogin View Post
    Smart meters
    I refuse to have a smart meter.

    However I fully expect that they will be in effect compulsory at some point.

    Sent from my SM-G970F using TZ-UK mobile app

  48. #48
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    11,344
    Quote Originally Posted by Velorum View Post
    No need for them to get involved in the charging side of things - simply levy a tax on any electrically propelled vehicle - perhaps by kerb weight or power output.

    The point is that the if revenues drop from one source the imperative will be to change the rules in order to make up the shortfall from another.

    Sent from my SM-G970F using TZ-UK mobile app
    This will happen as surely as night follows day!

    My thoughts are that, with all cars being ďconnectedĒ, supposedly for the consumerís benefit (social media, locating the car etc), every inch driven by every car will be recorded and monitored, probably also with some way of identifying the driver (unless driverless by then). This will allow easy charging on a ďpay as you driveĒ basis.

    It will also allow the government to charge every foreign vehicle on the road too.

  49. #49
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    By the TOLL Road
    Posts
    3,150
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post

    It will also allow the government to charge every foreign vehicle on the road too.
    Amen to that

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •